Allowed

Vijaya Bank v. Mr Rajaram P And Others

DRT21 Mar 2025TA/760/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bank of Baroda secured recovery of housing loan dues totaling over 63 lakhs from three defaulting respondents via a Debt Recovery Tribunal. The bank proved the loan, defaults, and issuance of statutory notices. The order allowed the claim and authorized recovery through mortgage property sale.

What did the court decide?

Recovery of Rs. 63,25,506.90 plus interest and costs; liberty to sell mortgaged property and personal assets for balance recovery.

Vijaya Bank versus Mr Rajaram P And Others — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2025)

¶1

T.A. No. 760 of 2023

¶2

21.03.2025

¶3

¶4

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHENNAI

¶5

Dated this the 21^st day of March, 2025

¶6

Present: SMT. S.V. GOWRAMMA

¶7

Presiding Officer

¶8

TRANSFERRED APPLICATION No. 760 of 2023

¶9

(Originally filed before DRT- II, Chennai as OA 565/2018 and thereafter transferred to this Tribunal and renumbered as TA No 760 of 2023)

¶10

*Bank of Baroda (Erstwhile Vijaya Bank) No.25, 3^rd Avenue, Indira Nagar, Chennai – 600 020 Rep by its Chief Manager

¶11

….Applicant

¶12

(*Amended vide order in IA No.1009/2019 dated 07.07.2021 in view of merger)

¶13

-Vs-

¶14

Mr. P. Rajaram S/o. Pichakaran S, No.57/1, Flat No.F1, Green Jade, Chettiar Agaram,

¶15

Porur, Chennai – 600 116

¶16

Also at No.2, 1^st Main Road, New Colony, Lakshmi Nagar, Porur, Chennai – 600 116

¶17

Mrs. Divya Rajaram W/o. Mr. Rajaram P No.57/1, Flat No.F1, Green Jade, Chettiar Agaram, Porur, Chennai – 600 116

¶18

Also at No.2, 1^st Main Road, New Colony, Lakshmi Nagar, Porur, Chennai – 600 116

¶19

T.A. No. 760 of 2023

¶20

¶21

21.03.2025

¶22

Mr. T. Karthikeyan

¶23

S/o. C. Thanikachalam, No.12/33, Sankarapuram 3^rd Street, Choolaimedu, Chennai – 600 094 …..Defendants Counsels on record / appeared:

¶24

Counsel for Applicant : Mr. G. Venkataramani Defendants 1 to 3 were set ex-parte on 29.09.2022

¶25

: - FINAL ORDER - :

¶26

This original application is filed on 02.07.2018 by erstwhile Vijaya Bank (since merged with Bank of Baroda), under Section 19 of Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (formerly Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993) against the defendants jointly and severally for recovery of a total sum of Rs.63,25,506.90p (Rupees

¶27

Sixty Three Lakhs Twenty Five Thousand Five Hundred & Six and Ninety Paise Only) due in respect of Housing Loan (A/c No.307308351000089) together with further interest @ 8.75% p.a., compounded with monthly rests and a penal interest of 2% per annum from the date of Application, till the date of realization in full, for Sale of property morefully described in OA Schedule and for costs of this application.

¶28

Originally, this Application was filed before DRT-II, Chennai, assigned OA No.565 of 2018, and thereafter in pursuance to the notification from Ministry of Finance, DFS dated 04.10.2022, OA No.565 of 2018 stood transferred to this Tribunal and renumbered as TA No.760 of 2023.

¶29

T.A. No. 760 of 2023

¶30

¶31

21.03.2025

¶32

Brief Facts of the case:

¶33

The Applicant submits that the application is filed within the period of limitation as prescribed under Section 24 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993, and the subject recovery claim falls within the jurisdiction of this Hon‟ble Tribunal.

¶34

The case of applicant bank is that the 1^st and 2^nd Defendants had approached the Applicant Bank for availing a Housing Loan for purchasing a Residential Apartment morefully described in the schedule hereunder.

¶35

It is submitted by applicant bank that considering the said request of defendants, the Applicant Bank sanctioned a Housing Loan of a sum of Rs.57,50,000/to the defendants under Loan Account No. 307308351000089. The 1^st Defendant is the main borrower in whose name the property was purchased and the 2^nd defendant is added as the co-borrower to the loan account.

¶36

The Applicant Bank submits that the terms of sanction along with terms and conditions were communicated to the 1^st and 2^nd Defendants by the Applicant Bank through its sanction memo dated 28.03.2017 and the sanction letter dated 30.03.2017 was duly accepted by the 1^st and 2^nd Defendants by counter signing the same.

¶37

T.A. No. 760 of 2023

¶38

21.03.2025

¶39

¶40

The Applicant Bank submits that in consideration of the sanction and release of above said housing loan, the 1^st and 2^nd Defendants have executed the Articles of Agreement dated 30.03.2017 agreeing to repay the housing loan amount. Thus the 1^st and 2^nd Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay and settle the loan amount to the Applicant Bank.

¶41

The Applicant Bank submits that the schedule mentioned property (secured asset) was purchased in the name of the 1^st Defendant by way of sale deed dated 03.04.2017 for the purchase of 451.098 Sq.ft., undivided share of land from one Mr. J. Loganathan, S/o Mr. S. Jayaraman represented by his power agent Mr. T. Karthikeyan, and a separate construction Agreement dated 03.04.2017 with M/s. Happy Home Promoters India Pvt. Ltd., represented by its director Mr. T. Karthikeyan (3^rd Defendant) for the construction of the built up area relating to the schedule mentioned property, and both documents were presented for registration before the Joint I Sub-Registrar, Chennai South at Saidapet, Chennai. However, registration of both sale deed and construction agreement were refused by the concerned sub-registrar for no valid reason. The Applicant Bank having financed the purchase of property comprised in the said documents was not served with a copy of the refusal order by the concerned sub-registrar. It is pertinent to note that the Applicant Bank being the secured creditor has stepped into the shoes of the 1^st Defendant and is entitled to get back custody of the registered

¶42

T.A. No. 760 of 2023

21.03.2025

documents.

It is submitted that the Applicant Bank had appealed to the concerned Joint I Sub-Registrar, Saidapet and the District Registrar (Admin), Chennai South, who is the Appellate Authority for the registration and release of said documents but of no avail. The original sale deeds and construction agreement are intended to be deposited with the Applicant Bank for creating an equitable mortgage to secure the loan sanctioned by the Bank to 1^st and 2^nd Defendants. Hence, the Applicant Bank is entitled to get back the custody of the registered documents as security for due repayment of loan amount, but the sub-registrar has unlawfully refused registration of documents, and the District Registrar being the Appellate authority has rejected the Appeal of the Applicant Bank to release documents, and unless the security documents are duly registered and released, the Applicant Bank‟s security interest will not be protected. The letters sent by the Applicant Bank to the concerned subregistrar and the District Registrar and the refusal letter received from the District Registrar are filed.

¶47

It is the case of applicant bank that the 3^rd Defendant is the Power Agent of the Land Owner and he is also the Builder, who had constructed the schedule mentioned property (secured assets), and he is also the executants of the impugned documents viz. sale deed and construction

¶48

T.A. No. 760 of 2023

¶49

21.03.2025

¶50

¶51

agreement both dated 03.04.2017, and he has filed an Appeal under Section 72 of the Registration Act, 1908 to the District Registrar against the refusal order of the Sub-Registrar, but till date no order has been passed by the District Registrar on the said appeal. A copy of the appeal dated 28.02.2018 filed by the 3^rd defendant is filed along with OA.

¶52

It is submitted by applicant bank that the loan amount forming part of sale consideration sanctioned to the 1^st and 2^nd Defendants was actually paid to the 3^rd Defendant, who in his dual capacity as a Builder and power agent of the land owner accepted the loan amount and undertook to execute documents in favour of the 1^st Defendant purchaser. The 3^rd Defendant is the executants of the impugned documents viz. sale deed and construction agreement, and he has assumed the responsibility of completing the registration formalities and getting the documents released from the registering authority, and his Appeal under Section 72 of the Registration Act, 1908 to the District Registrar is pending, and if the appeal is allowed and documents are released to him then he must handover the same to the applicant bank, therefore he is also made a formal party to this Application.

¶53

To secure the due repayment of said loan amount with interest to the Applicant, a memorandum recording deposit of title deeds (MODT) dated 07.04.2017 was executed by the 1^st Defendant in favour of the

¶54

T.A. No. 760 of 2023

¶55

21.03.2025

¶56

¶57

Applicant Bank which was registered as document no.3342 of 2017 in the Joint I Sub-Registrar, Saidapet, Chennai South, with an intent to create a security interest on the schedule mentioned property in favour of the Applicant Bank. Thus the Applicant Bank is a mortgagee and is entitled to proceed against the mortgaged properties for recovery of loan. The Encumbrance Certificate dated 16.08.2017 obtained from Joint 1 Sub-Registrar, Chennai South and filed reflects the above MODT entry.

¶58

The Applicant Bank submits that after availing the said loan the 1^st and 2^nd Defendants have been highly irregular in payment of EMI. They have not paid EMIs properly as agreed and promised by them. Till date, they have paid a sum of Rs.1,46,614.10 only towards repayment of loan amount.

¶59

The Applicant Bank sent demand letters by post to the 1^st and 2^nd Defendants on various dates viz. 28.06.2017 and 10.07.2017 by way of registered post, which were served upon them.

¶60

The Applicant Bank invoked SARFAESI Act measures against the property mortgaged by 1^st Defendant. The Applicant Bank issued a Demand Notice under Section 13(2) on 03.10.2017. As nothing was forthcoming after the statutory period of 60 days, the bank had issued Possession Notice under Section 13(4) of the said Act on 08.12.2017 by way of affixing the Possession Notice in the premises and effected paper

¶61

T.A. No. 760 of 2023

¶62

¶63

21.03.2025

¶64

publication in leading Newspaper one in English Daily namely „The New Indian Express and another in Tamil Daily namely „Dinamani‟ both published on 12.12.2017.

¶65

It is submitted that in spite of repeated reminders 1^st and 2^nd Defendants have not come forward to clear the outstanding balance dues. Hence, the Applicant Bank issued a Advocate Notice dated 07.04.2018 by RPAD to the 1^st and 2^nd Defendants to repay the entire loan amount. However, notices sent to both the 1^st and 2^nd Defendants were returned undelivered by the Postal Department with an endorsement “addressee left” or “no such person in this address”.

¶66

The 1^st and 2^nd Defendants were residing at No.2, 1^st Main Road, New Colony, Lakshmi Nagar, Porur, Chennai when the loan papers with the Applicant Bank were signed by them. Upon purchasing the flat property constructed by the 3^rd Defendant, the 1st Defendant, who then shifted to the present address at No.57/1, Flat No.F1, GREEN JADE, Chettiar Agaram, Porur, Chennai – 600 116. The legal notices sent to both the addresses were returned undelivered with endorsements “addressee left or no such person”. The 1^st and 2^nd Defendants have not informed the Applicant Bank about the change of address, if any. The very fact that the Defendants are purposefully avoiding service of legal notices on them, thwarting the Bank from taking legal action for recovery of loan amount

¶67

T.A. No. 760 of 2023

¶68

¶69

21.03.2025

¶70

with a malafide intention of cheating the Applicant Bank.

¶71

It is submitted by Applicant Bank that after availing the said facility, the defendant deliberately failed to repay the loan amount availed in spite of repeated demands and reminders by Applicant Bank. As defendant miserably failed to make repayments in the aforesaid loan account, the applicant bank classified the aforesaid loan account as NPA (Non-Performing Assets) on 30.09.2017, as per the guidelines issued by the RBI but they had failed to do so. Hence, this Original Application (OA) has been filed to recover the dues from the defendants.

¶72

After the filing of the OA, summons was sent to the Defendants through Registered Post with Acknowledgment Due, which was returned unserved with postal endorsement as „Left / No Such Person‟. Applicant bank had caused paper publication of the notice and filed proof thereof. When OA was taken up on 29.09.2022 even after giving sufficient time, there was no appearance or representation from the defendants. Hence, defendants 1 to 4 were placed ex-parte on 29.09.2022.

¶73

Heard the submissions of Applicant Bank and perused the records.

¶74

To prove the case of the Applicant Bank, Ms. S. Annapoona M, Chief Manager of Zonal Stressed Asset Recovery Branch (ZOSARB), Chennai representing the Applicant Bank, has filed her Affidavit by way of evidence

¶75

T.A. No. 760 of 2023

¶76

¶77

21.03.2025

¶78

and same was considered as evidence of AW-1 and list of documents came to be marked as Ex A-1 to A-21 . As the defendants remained ex-parte, the OA claim remains unchallenged. There is no contra evidence available on record to repudiate the claim of the Applicant Bank.

¶79

With regard to the amount advanced, the interest applied, the conduct and operations in the account and the default committed, this Tribunal comes to the conclusion that the applicant bank is entitled for a final order on the following terms:

¶80

: O R D E R:

¶81

The OA is allowed with costs,

¶82

(a) The applicant bank is allowed to recover from the Defendants

¶83

1 to 4 jointly and severally, a total sum of Rs.63,25,506.90p (Rupees Sixty Three Lakhs Twenty Five Thousand Five Hundred & Six and Ninety Paise Only) due in respect of Housing Loan (A/c No.307308351000089) together with further interest @ 8.75% p.a., compounded with monthly rests and a penal interest of 2% per annum from the date of Application, till the date of realization in full along with costs of this application.

¶84

T.A. No. 760 of 2023

¶85

21.03.2025

¶86

¶87

(b) In the event of failure of the defendants to pay the aforesaid amount, the Applicant Bank is at liberty to recover the amount by sale of the OA schedule mentioned immovable property.

¶88

(c) If the sale proceeds of the schedule mentioned property is not sufficient to satisfy the dues as ordered above, the applicant bank is at liberty to sell the personal assets of the Defendants (both movable and immovable) to recover the balance dues as required under law, for which the Defendants to disclose to the Tribunal particulars of other properties or assets owned by the Defendants;

¶89

(d) The 3^rd Defendant is hereby instructed to hand over the Security Documents viz. the Sale Deed and Construction Agreement to the Applicant Bank after the same are Registered and released by the concerned Sub-Registrar.

¶90

(e) The applicant bank shall file the latest memo of calculation of OA amount together with interest, costs etc., to be paid by the defendants duly considering the amounts, if any, paid by the defendants and/or amount realized by sale of assets etc., during the intervening period after the filing of the OA, enabling the Registry to prepare Recovery Certificate for the amount to be paid by defendants to the applicant bank.

¶91

T.A. No. 760 of 2023

¶92

¶93

21.03.2025

¶94

(f) The applicant bank shall file memo of costs within ten days from the date of this final order.

¶95

(g) Recovery Certificate shall be drawn up and issued to the Recovery Officer in terms of the final order.

¶96

A copy of this order be communicated to the parties concerned.

¶97

Sd/(S.V. GOWRAMMA)

¶98

PRESIDING OFFICER, DRT-III, CHENNAI

¶99

(Dictated to Steno (Sudhakar), transcribed by him, corrected, signed and pronounced by me on this the 21^st day of March, 2025)

¶100

ANNEXURES

¶101

WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE APPLICANT BANK :

¶102

AW-1: Ms. S. Annapoona M, Chief Manager of Zonal Stressed Asset Recovery Branch (ZOSARB) representing the Applicant Bank.

¶103

Exhibits on the part of the Applicant:

¶104

Sl. No.	Description of Documents	Exhibit No.
1.	Sanction Memo of the Applicant bank dated 28.03.2017	A-1
2.	Sanction Letter of the Applicant bank dated 30.03.2017	A-2
3.	Articles of Agreement dated 30.03.2017	A-3
4.	Sale Deed (Un-Registered) for Sale of UDS in land by land owner in favour of Borrower (1^st Defendant) dated 03.04.2017	A-4
5.	Construction Agreement (un-registered) between M/s. Happy Home Promoters India Pvt. Ltd., and the Borrower (1^stDefendant) dated 10.03.2017	A-5
6.	Memorandum recording deposit of title deeds	A-6

¶105

T.A. No. 760 of 2023

¶106

¶107

21.03.2025

¶108

	executed by the 1^stDefendant in favour of the Applicant Bank dated 07.04.2017
7.	Encumbrance Certificate obtained from Joint 1 Sub-Registrar, Chennai South dated 16.08.2017	A-7
8.	Demand Letter sent by the Applicant Bank to Defendants 1 with Postal acknowledgement dated 28.06.2017	A-8
9	Demand Letter sent by the Applicant Bank to Defendant 2 with postal acknowledgement dated 10.07.2017	A-9
10	Letter from Applicant Bank to Joint 1 Sub- Registrar, Saidapet, Chennai with Postal Acknowledgement dated 07.08.2017	A-10
11	Demand Notice issued u/s 13(2) of SARFAESI Act by the Applicant Bank to 1^stand 2^ndDefendants dated 03.10.2017	A-11
12	Possession Notice issued under Section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act by the Applicant Bank to 1^st and 2^ndDefendants dated 08.12.2017	A-12
13	Paper Publication in English daily The New Indian Express dated 12.12.2017	A-13
14	Paper Publication in Tamil daily Dinamani dated 12.12.2017	A-14
15	Letter from the Applicant Bank to the District Registrar (Admin) dated 08.12.2017	A-15
16	Letter from the Applicant Bank Additional Inspector General of Registration, Chennai South dated 29.12.2017	A-16
17	The letter dated 23.02.2018 from the District Registrar (Admin) to the Applicant Bank in Tamil along with its English translation dated 23.02.2018	A-17
18	Appeal under Section 72 of the Registration Act filed by Defendant 3 to the District Registrar (Admin) dated 28.02.2018	A-18
19	The Lawyers Notice with returned postal covers sent on behalf of Applicant Bank to Defendants 1 & 2 dated 07.04.2018	A-19
20	Statement of Account maintained by the Applicant Bank during the normal course of business transaction.	A-20
21	The Statement on legal and other charges not included in Ex-A20 above.	A-21

¶109

T.A. No. 760 of 2023

¶110

21.03.2025

¶111

¶112

Witness Examined for the Defendants: -Nil-

¶113

List of Documents Exhibited for the Defendants: -Nil –

¶114

SCHEDULE

¶115

Mortgaged Property owned by the 1^st Defendant

¶116

All that piece and parcel of residential apartment: -

¶117

Postal Addr	ess	Revenue details	Village/ Taluk/District	Extent of Land	Extent of building
Flat No.F1, Floor, Green	First Jade,	Survey No.57/1,	Chettiyaragargam Village, Ambattur	451.098 Sq.ft.,	1198 Sq.ft.,
S.K. Chettiyaragar Village, Chenn	Nagar, am ai	as per Patta No.3671 Survey No.57/1C	Taluk, Thiruvallur District	Undivide d Share in 15696 Sq.ft.,	super built up area
Boundaries f North by	or La Land other	nd in S.No. owned by M s	57/1C r. Jaganathan and
South by	Land	owned by M	r. Chinnasamy Naicker
East by	Land	owned by M	rs. Gangammal
West by	Land	owned by M	r. Nanda Kumar

¶118

Situated within the sub-registration district of Joint 1 Sub-Registrar, Saidapet, and Registration District of Chennai South.

¶119

Sd/(S.V. GOWRAMMA) PRESIDING OFFICER, DRT-III, CHENNAI

Vijaya Bank v. Mr Rajaram P And Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vijaya Bank v. Mr Rajaram P And Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Indian Overseas Bank versus Sivaraja

Bhavani versus 30

State Bank of India versus Karthick

Bank of Baroda versus Jojo

Union Bank of India versus M/S Anikipatti Enterprises

Punjab National Bank versus M/S Ari Travels